About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
, neutral jurors, with the government presenting its case and defense challenging it. that's the system. look, we have that system here because the kings of england didn't always give justice to the colonists. and we fought a revolution and wrote a constitution to assure that the federal government here, and the states here, could not treat us without justice, could not punish us without a jury trial. to interrogate him and not advise him of his right to remain silent, to take to guantanamo bay, to treat him as if he were a soldie soldier froa foreign government to kill americans is not just, and nowhere authorized under the law. the rule of law exists before the crime, and that the law be followed when you're prosecuting this person as it existed at the time of the crime. there's no provision for the president of the united states to take this guy, as horrendous as we believe he is, as profound the evidence of his guilt, away from the criminal justice system and ship him to guantanamo bay. i'll make senator graham's argument for him. if this guy is really a soldier from a foreign count
/11 attack in productions for the cia defense personnel based upon legal guidance that has since been repudiated. the most important decision may have been to declare the geneva convention did not apply to al qaeda and taliban captives in afghanistan or guantanamo. the administration never specified what rules would have applied instead. the task force believes that u.s. defense intelligence professionals and service members in harm's way of the clear orders on the treatment of detainees requiring at a minimum compliance with, and article 3 as the geneva convention to be the this was not done. civilian leaders and military commanders have an affirmative responsibility to ensure that their subordinates comply with all of the war. president obama has committed to observe the conventions through an executive order but a future president could change it by the stroke of a pen. congress, our recommendation needs to work with the administration to strengthen the torture statute, the war crimes act and the uniform code of military justice to remove the loopholes that allow the torture to occ
and prosecute him in federal court. >> you don't want to turn over intelligence gathering to a criminal defense lawyer and the terrorist. you want to be able to gather tell without a lawyer present. under the law of war there is no right to a legal counsel when you're being questioned for national security purposes. i hope the obama administration will allow us that option that exists in our law. they have a very bad track record here. >> reporter: fox news is told investigators are probing a potential link to a islamist group as first reported on fox over the weekend. they were responsible for the attack on moscow airport. in response the group issued a statement saying their disagreement is with russia. they did not deny knowing the brothers. also according to one source who has reviewed that, they were undercut in their claims trying to deny any connection because they pointed the finger as russia as being responsible for these bombings which of course there is no evidence to support that, jon. jon: catherine herridge, lots of tangled leads to unravel here. catherine, thank you. >> reporter:
, fbi and department of defense and u.s. attorney. how do you investigate a guy like this? >> he will be interrogated. all you can do is write his answers down. this will happen. it will happen as soon as possible. they are not going to give them a lot of leeway here. there are important questions they have to follow up on from an operational standpoint. people want to ask why did you do this? important is who helped you? who was your brother in contact with during his time overseas. was there a support structure we can get on immediately. there are literally at the door of his hospital room standing by as soon as it is able to happen he was on him. >> can you tell us about this and that and the guy says, you know what, i don't want to tell you about anything. you have a cold blooded killer or someone alleged to be that. you think he is going to just breakdown and friendly say, yeah, i'll tell you why my brother did this and we were funded by this one. you think talking to him you are going to get him to spill the beans? >> he will be in the u.s. system now. if he declines to say
disarmament. the reaganites in the defense department were horrified by this and put a stop to it but reagan didn't go all the way with reaganism when he had a chance to end the cold war, especially the nuclear threats. so it's a hard-core republican belief. if you remember the pup pup prime -- republican primaries of 2012, it was not that long ago there were eight or ten republican candidates in simi valley for a debate at the reagan library and every one of them said reagan set the example how maring be strong, reagan did with the soviet union and we should do it today in iran, we should do it -- we were right toy trite in iraq. america should use its power to achieve its spend destroy its enemies. i worked in the cold war and in the middle east. you have 29% of the american people agree with that today. >> richard, do you want to say something? you're leaning forward. >> no. >> okay. we want to take questions from the audience if anybody has a question, and i think there's a microphone somewhere that someone is going to bring up. why don't we start right up here on the aisle, blue shirt.
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)